Meta-analysis of serum and/or plasma D-dimer in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection

17Citations
Citations of this article
30Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the diagnostic value of D-dimer in detecting periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Methods: A systematic search and screening of relevant studies was performed in the databases PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase using the following medical subject headings (MeSH) or keywords: "arthroplasty or joint prosthesis or joint replacement or periprosthetic joint or prosthetic joint", "infection or infectious or infected", and "D-dimer or serum D-dimer or plasma D-dimer or fibrin degradation products". Data were subsequently analysed and processed using Meta-Disc. Results: Seven studies with 1285 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio were 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-0.79), 0.69 (95% CI 0.66-0.72), 3.01 (95% CI 1.84-4.93), 0.32 (95% CI 0.19-0.53), and 10.20 (95% CI 3.63-28.64), respectively. Subgroup analyses showed that the use of serum D-dimer had better sensitivity and specificity than plasma D-dimer for the diagnosis of PJI. Conclusions: Serum D-dimer was shown to have a better diagnostic value than plasma D-dimer for the diagnosis of PJI. Further research is required for clarification.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Li, C., Margaryan, D., Ojeda-Thies, C., Perka, C., & Trampuz, A. (2020). Meta-analysis of serum and/or plasma D-dimer in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-020-01808-1

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free